Tag: development

see one of the failures in myself and in other people like me is where you do something wrong–you do it the wrong way or you do it for the wrong reasons–but if you don’t experience the failure, it doesn’t change the fact that it was the wrong thing to do. You’re really just deferring that failure and maybe increasing its magnitude.

It’s a great observation and a reminder that things are rarely just black and white.
It’s not hard to find examples of this in play. As an example take extreme career success that’s paid with a broken family life. Is it a success or failure?

Looking at the outcomes of choices and decisions from multiple perspective is probably the best way to avoid norrow thinking and chasing something that isn’t a true success.

Andy Rachleff told me that one of his best business lessons is that you learn far more from success than from failure, and that you should use success as a compass. Drive hard in the direction of what works rather than trying to shore up weaknesses. If something is working, more of that thing, or a better version is likely to work too. A better version of a failure is likely still going to fail.

I would teach them Pascal’s Law: the consequences of decisions and choices should dominate the probabilities of outcomes. And I would also teach them about Leibniz’s warning that models work, but only for the most part. I would remind them of what the man who trained me in investing taught me: Risk-taking is an inevitable ingredient in investing, and in life, but never take a risk you do not have to take.

Some psychologists call this constant chasing of pleasure the “hedonic treadmill” because people who are constantly striving for a “better life” end up expending a ton of effort only to end up in the same place.**

This takes us back to John Stuart Mill, the great nineteenth-century economist and philosopher, who believed that nobody can be a good economist if he or she is just an economist.

Most economics students are not required to study psychology, philosophy, history, or politics. They are spoon-fed models of the economy, based on unreal assumptions, and tested on their competence in solving mathematical equations. They are never given the mental tools to grasp the whole picture.

Biological systems are generally hacks that evolved to be good enough for a certain environment. They are far from pretty top-down designed systems. And to accommodate an ever-changing environment they are rarely the most optimal system on a mico-level, preferring to optimize for survival over any one particular attribute.

Becoming a master of something makes you a very special person that seems to posses some extraordinary talents and skills that no one else has or will ever be able to have. Yet that may not be a truth.Author Robert Greene shares his research that suggest that everyone can achieve a mastery. It’s long process that requires dedication, passion, open mind and willingness to learn with great intensity.

The path to mastery is relatively simple.

The first move is the most important: follow a career route that is matched to your inclinations and interests. Develop skills in as many areas related to this interest as possible. Work with mentors to streamline the process. Discipline yourself, gaining self–mastery. Learn how to work with people and defend yourself against the aggressors.

In a guest post on CopyBlogger.com site he shares some of his discoveries and observations.